A Florida man has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming that ChatGPT-4o provided dangerous medical advice that discouraged him from seeking treatment for symptoms that preceded a life-threatening pulmonary embolism. The case highlights a critical gap in how AI companies handle health-related queries and raises questions about liability when AI systems cross the line from providing general information to practicing medicine without a license.

What Happened to Scott Winters?

Scott Winters, a former pastor, filed the lawsuit on Wednesday in San Francisco County Superior Court. According to the complaint, Winters consulted ChatGPT-4o in 2025 after experiencing regular dizziness and unstable blood pressure. The chatbot allegedly downplayed his symptoms, advised him to stay home and remain "recliner-bound," and suggested he would need to experience several more episodes before his condition warranted serious medical attention.

Winters followed that guidance. Several weeks later, in July 2025, he suffered a massive pulmonary embolism caused by blood clots and was brought "to the brink of death." One of his doctors later linked the embolism to his prolonged immobility, which Winters claims was recommended by ChatGPT. Hours before the medical emergency, Winters also asked the chatbot whether tenderness in his groin warranted a hospital visit. The lawsuit alleges that this pain was an early sign of the pulmonary embolism.

What Are the Legal Claims Against OpenAI?

Winters' legal team accuses OpenAI of prioritizing engagement and profit over user safety and failing to install adequate safeguards around medical advice. The lawsuit seeks financial damages, stronger guardrails on health-related responses, and a suspension of ChatGPT Health pending a comprehensive safety evaluation.

The case represents a significant moment in AI accountability. Unlike previous disputes over AI-generated content or copyright, this lawsuit directly challenges whether large language models should be allowed to provide medical guidance without clear disclaimers or restrictions. The complaint alleges that ChatGPT-4o crossed from offering general information into the territory of practicing medicine without a license, a serious legal violation in most jurisdictions.

How Should AI Companies Handle Medical Queries?

• Clear Disclaimers: AI systems should prominently warn users that they are not medical professionals and cannot replace consultation with licensed healthcare providers.
• Symptom Triage Restrictions: Chatbots should avoid downplaying or minimizing reported symptoms, especially when users describe potentially serious conditions like chest pain, difficulty breathing, or signs of blood clots.
• Escalation Protocols: When users report symptoms that could indicate emergencies, AI systems should recommend immediate professional medical evaluation rather than suggesting home remedies or watchful waiting.
• Independent Safety Audits: AI companies should submit health-related features to third-party safety evaluations before public release to identify dangerous failure modes.

What Does This Mean for AI Industry Trust?

The Winters lawsuit arrives at a moment when AI companies are already facing a broader credibility crisis. According to reporting on the industry's trust problem, AI labs have spent years warning about existential risks from their own models while simultaneously promoting those same models, creating skepticism about their claims. When genuine safety incidents occur, the public and industry insiders often assume they are marketing stunts rather than real problems.

"I see a lot of people saying this must be not completely true, there's some lies, or just a PR stunt. That suggests the frontier labs are inherently untrustworthy, as it makes no sense that they'd make up stuff without any clear sensible incentive in this case," said Charlie Eriksen, a security researcher at Aikido Security.

Charlie Eriksen, Security Researcher at Aikido Security

The Winters case could accelerate calls for regulatory oversight of AI health applications. Unlike other AI capabilities, medical advice has direct, measurable consequences for human safety. If courts find OpenAI liable for ChatGPT's medical guidance, it could establish precedent that forces AI companies to implement stricter controls on health-related features or remove them entirely.

The lawsuit also raises questions about Sam Altman's personal liability as CEO. While tech executives are typically shielded from direct liability for their companies' products, cases involving gross negligence or failure to implement basic safety measures sometimes pierce that protection. The complaint's emphasis on OpenAI's alleged prioritization of "engagement and profit over safety" suggests Winters' legal team is building a case that could extend beyond corporate liability.

As AI systems become more capable and more widely used for sensitive tasks, the Winters case may serve as a watershed moment for how courts and regulators think about AI accountability. The outcome could reshape how companies like OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic approach health-related features in their products.